This thread isn't about the mistakes made in the past. It is all about continuing to fund and work with each of these tribal sheikdoms going forward.

THAT is short-term strategizing that will bite us in the future. Let's hold our administration to account to come up with a better long-term policy that will benefit the US AFTER January 2009. What I see here is an "Apres moi le deluge" policy which polishes a political apple for 7 months and leaves our nation standing holding a bucket of manure for years after.

Click to expand...

That could be true but then it could work out. We have to see it through, there is no viable option going forward.

So...my initial belief that in order to preserve "peace" there, a strong, almost brutal leader (you know, like ol' what's his name) is actually a necessity, and you bargain with that leader to keep the peace.

Click to expand...

Tragically, yes. In our self-interests it would best be a brutal Pro-US dictator.

The other option is partition. That may be the best for the people living in what is today called "Iraq".

This thread isn't about the mistakes made in the past. It is all about continuing to fund and work with each of these tribal sheikdoms going forward.

THAT is short-term strategizing that will bite us in the future. Let's hold our administration to account to come up with a better long-term policy that will benefit the US AFTER January 2009. What I see here is an "Apres moi le deluge" policy which polishes a political apple for 7 months and leaves our nation standing holding a bucket of manure for years after.

BTW, isn't anyone curous to know exactly WHAT our "allies" the Rishawi brothers were smuggling to Iraq from Syria before the AQ tribe cut in on their "business"??????? Note: They were smuggling across the Syrian-Iraqi border against the EXPRESS warnings of the United States of America in 2003, 2004 and 2005.

Click to expand...

That is a fair point....... However, I don't think they felt they had much choice. They had to act, and temporarily, things have swung the other way. That's not to say that it's a perfect solution, and it's only your opinion that it will come back to bite us. It very well might. We did what we had to do to suppress the insurgency in order to focus on our primary threat (as we saw it), which was AQ and Mahdi special groups (aided by Iran).

The relative quiet has allowed us to positively DECIMATE AQ in the interim, We've also made great hay against the special groups to. Actually the Iraqi army has, which has given them confidence and battle tested skills. Will we later need equal deft handling of the "former insurgency" elements. Positively.... I'm confident that can be worked out, cuz unlike the ideological thread, that can be placated by money. Unlike Afghanistan, where they have a "home free" site in the frontier lands of Pakistan, AQ is being squeezed to death in Iraq as they get isolated in the open.

Most people understand who they the tribal folks are, what they were, and what potential issues they may cause in the future. But the strategy all along was to mollify one threat temporarily in order to destroy the other ones (which we deemed, correctly I think) more of the long term threat. They are at the table now, and it may be out of convenience, but there is purpose. I think it was one of the few options we had available in early 07 when we took it. I'm not sure that they think that situation is done, just that they think that diplomacy holds the long term solution.

Time will tell if who is right.

Again, I was not intending to question loyalty, so if you think I was, I apologize. My point was it's not a good thing that guy got blown up at this time, even though at one time it might have been. As they say, strange bedfellows.

This is pretty simplified and obviously there were many things that and factors that have gone on besides just the above.

That is a fair point....... However, I don't think they felt they had much choice. They had to act, and temporarily, things have swung the other way. That's not to say that it's a perfect solution, and it's only your opinion that it will come back to bite us. It very well might. We did what we had to do to suppress the insurgency in order to focus on our primary threat (as we saw it), which was AQ and Mahdi special groups (aided by Iran).

The relative quiet has allowed us to positively DECIMATE AQ in the interim, We've also made great hay against the special groups to. Actually the Iraqi army has, which has given them confidence and battle tested skills. Will we later need equal deft handling of the "former insurgency" elements. Positively.... I'm confident that can be worked out, cuz unlike the ideological thread, that can be placated by money. Unlike Afghanistan, where they have a "home free" site in the frontier lands of Pakistan, AQ is being squeezed to death in Iraq as they get isolated in the open.

Most people understand who they the tribal folks are, what they were, and what potential issues they may cause in the future. But the strategy all along was to mollify one threat temporarily in order to destroy the other ones (which we deemed, correctly I think) more of the long term threat. They are at the table now, and it may be out of convenience, but there is purpose. I think it was one of the few options we had available in early 07 when we took it. I'm not sure that they think that situation is done, just that they think that diplomacy holds the long term solution.

Time will tell if who is right.

Again, I was not intending to question loyalty, so if you think I was, I apologize. My point was it's not a good thing that guy got blown up at this time, even though at one time it might have been. As they say, strange bedfellows.

This is pretty simplified and obviously there were many things that and factors that have gone on besides just the above.

Click to expand...

PiNY, I am glad we're back on subject and I appreciate the discussion.

When you write "The relative quiet has allowed us to positively DECIMATE AQ in the interim" - are you referring to real Al Qaeda or it's fan club in Iraq?

I have just seen too many repeat performances over the past 25 years of us engaging and supporting factions and tribes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, etc. that have come back to bite us in the arse. Even Karzai is now giving interviews where he praises the Taliban fighters and says he wishes he had them as his soldiers and that they do things right as opposed to the foreign allies.

Time after time after time, the moment our money spigot turns off, these folks climb over each other to proclaim Death to America. Don't delude yourself.

PiNY, I am glad we're back on subject and I appreciate the discussion.

When you write "The relative quiet has allowed us to positively DECIMATE AQ in the interim" - are you referring to real Al Qaeda or it's fan club in Iraq?

I have just seen too many repeat performances over the past 25 years of us engaging and supporting factions and tribes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, etc. that have come back to bite us in the arse. Even Karzai is now giving interviews where he praises the Taliban fighters and says he wishes he had them as his soldiers and that they do things right as opposed to the foreign allies.

Time after time after time, the moment our money spigot turns off, these folks climb over each other to proclaim Death to America. Don't delude yourself.

Click to expand...

All very valid concerns. I think that both AQ's (real and the wannabe sect in Iraq), fortune's are now tied a little closer than you they might like and you might be giving credit for. AQ is really an ideal, a brand name if you will. Given all the events in Iraq, the general AQ Brand name has been severely damaged and I think that that has had a tangible effect on both the Iraqi movement (really in bad shape), and the mother group in Pakistan (smarting pretty good too). Both have been hurt real bad and the leadership drain is having a significant impact on operations. Part of that was our doing, a lot of it was tactical errors on their part (AQI).

The afghan situation is really troubling. Part of the problem is they have a fire free place to regroup in. They don't in Iraq, and are getting squeezed all over the pace, by us and Iraqis. We will have to make some fundamental changes in what we are doing there. That will happen in the future, sooner, rather than later.

As for the spigots, they don't have to turn off in Iraq, they are sitting on a virtual money machine, they just don't how to efficiently harvest and get it moving. The stability of the government will allow that process to continue and accelerate, at least I think that would be the plan. Believe me, it's not all rosy and we need to be careful still, but if we can keep the ceasefire (the key to a lot of this) in place and the significant ethnic tensions tamped down, we will have come a long way in getting most of the way out of there and focusing attention to other critical areas (Afghanistan). Part of the trouble there is that the primary source of income comes from the Opiate trade. It's a tough situation at the moment.

AQ is definitely on it's heels though, big time. At that is a good thing.

Overall, I pessimistically optimistic now, but compared to last year at this time, I'm practically UPBEAT.